What has changed in the conditions for YouTube some stars are threatening to leave?

In the last hours, someyoutuberswith a large number of followers found the unpleasant surprise that the platform haddeactivated advertisingsome of their videos, along with a warning notice was because its content was not “appropriate for advertisers.”

This movement has done nothing but causeconfusionamong the community of content producers to YouTube, which sees it as a form of censorship, but there arethose who defendthat thisis only a change in the way those conditions are written and that, in fact, are now clearer than before.

So what is thechangeexactly?Not evenclear yetthat is a new policy or a simple change in the way of putting it, but what is clear is that YouTube hasstrengthened its guidelinesto decide what kind of content is “advertiser-friendly”, ie suitable for advertisers.

YouTube, meanwhile, defends himself saying that politicshas not really changed, but it is animprovement in the notification processto give developers the opportunity to rectify.

As we read in thehelp sectionof YouTube, the inappropriate content for advertisers include, inter alia:

Suggestive scenes of nature, including partial nudity and green mood

Violence, including images of serious injuries and events related to violent extremism

Incitement sale, consumption or abuse of drugs and controlled substances

Events and controversial and sensitive issues such as war or political, natural disasters and tragedies (though not explicit images appear)

The curious thing is that almost all know someyoutuberfamous thatincludes any of these points(or all) in their videos.Hence many of them areworriedabout the future of their ability to monetize on YouTube, especially if they have no other source of income.

The reaction of theyoutubers

It is still unclear whatimpactwill these new guidelines on creating content, since everything depends on the discipline with YouTube toapply the rules.So many of them are limiting to wait to see what happens, while others appear to have panicked – and who has thewhole thing to joke is taken.

A good example of the importance of these changes is, for example, the case of Philip DeFranco ayoutuberwith half followers that states “want toclose my YouTube channel, and I have very clear why” 4 million

Philipcommented on Twitterthat a video denouncing the abusive behavior of a user Lyft was marked as YouTube for havinginappropriate content.The thing has not stopped there, since few hours after the channel DeFranco hasalready accumulated a dozen more marked as inappropriate videos.For it is, quite simply, a form of censorship.

In the case of DeFranco, thisyoutuberensures that fortunately has other financing;but other content creators do not have that safety net and faceeconomic lossesthat eventually could make their unsustainable channel (and with it, their way of life).

On theother hand, as noted above, there are those who take these renewed advertising guidelineshumorously, and lunges without fear of creating a video where broken every one of the rules that prevent ayoutubermonetize their content.

Meanwhile, video creators from around the world continue toreceivenotices YouTubeby “not suitable content for advertisers ,” while the video platform, but has answered the doubts of some, still doesnot make a general statement that explains the why this change and help ease concerns.